PMvdb395DA
New Member
- Oct 12, 2006
- 1,165
- Boat Info
- 360DA '03 6,5 kw kohler generator, AC, etc.
- Engines
- Yanmar 315Hp diesels
Also from boatdiesel
I am not one to argue another author's ideas on fuel filtration when I think someone is suggesting (in so many words) that fuel that is cleaner, is better. So, I 100% agree it would be very difficult to say that "too much" fuel filtration is possible with the fuel injection equipment used w/ these 60-80HP per liter diesels today, so having fuel "too clean" may not applicable anymore. But, of course there are practical limits as to a filtering system that filters to well beyond needed cleanliness, and I will suggest that maybe something along the lines of practicality might be missing in many ideas written on the subject.
This is what should be conveyed and understood about "too clean"...
Actually, filtering down to a nominal 2 mic level probably could have some quantifiable benefits ( injector seat & injection plunger/cam wear), even for and an engine that does not require that level of filtration. But this is not the reason I sell replacement injection pumps a couple of times a year and rebuilt injectors about 10 times a year. It's because of water contamination, and the fact that the operator only relied on his 1st line of defense (typically a "RACOR") and the marketing hype around it that led to complacency regarding fuel quality... So, I'm not going to argue about whether filtering below manufacturers' specs has a benefit - what I'll argue is the way most people filter fuel. And, that typically is that the vessel and / or operator is relying on a single filter to remove water and contaminants before he sends that "filtered" fuel to his on-engine" last chance fuel filter - This is a major mistake in judgment as to think that the last chance filter will save him. We hope to convince our customers that a well designed fuel system will deliver fuel to the engine, and to it's "on-engine fuel filter", that is all ready clean enough that he is not relying on this "last chance" filter to save him.
Triple Multi-Stage for problem fuel tanks - QSL's in a small "crew boat" with problem fuel tanks - No chances taken here as we have a "water absorbing" media filter in the middle and a FS19596 with a WIF Sensor as our polisher/final stage - never too much!
My thoughts, experience, and reasoning will never change about using multi-stage "primary filtration" and making sure you have the filtering capacity to get you through a lousy tank of fuel, or maybe two. With the advent of "common rail" fuel injection, just the slightest amount of water that makes it to the pump and/or injector will now have catastrophic consequences for not only your fuel system components, but could also take-out the engine.
Some RACOR Thoughts
A Racor 1000 can have very acceptable capacity when used w/ a 300-600 HP engine in typical recreational service. Use that same filter on a 200-400 HP diesel in an application that runs 2000-5000 hours per year, and in many/most cases if this unit used as the only filter before the engine, this widely used filter has unacceptable life between maintenance intervals. My point here is that designed flow rate of a filter should not be the only reason for selecting filter size but rather needs to be chosen based upon the application and vessel current use, and past fuel problem history (if any) of the vessel.
As many operators will confirm from personal experience, servicing a "Racor" can be a challenge if you want to try and keep the bowl clear and clean. Lots of parts, seals and just a plain hassle and extremely messy to deal with. But, get it clean once, install a bulk separator in front of it, and you'll see a noticeable change in the maintenance of the Racor over the next few years, along w/ giving you that added layer of protection. Also, more times than not, I have seen the bowl on a Racor so dirty that its effective use as a "visual" has become totally worthless. My preference and experience is not to rely on a "visual" at all, but to drain a sample of fuel before you use your vessel.
I am not one to argue another author's ideas on fuel filtration when I think someone is suggesting (in so many words) that fuel that is cleaner, is better. So, I 100% agree it would be very difficult to say that "too much" fuel filtration is possible with the fuel injection equipment used w/ these 60-80HP per liter diesels today, so having fuel "too clean" may not applicable anymore. But, of course there are practical limits as to a filtering system that filters to well beyond needed cleanliness, and I will suggest that maybe something along the lines of practicality might be missing in many ideas written on the subject.
This is what should be conveyed and understood about "too clean"...
Actually, filtering down to a nominal 2 mic level probably could have some quantifiable benefits ( injector seat & injection plunger/cam wear), even for and an engine that does not require that level of filtration. But this is not the reason I sell replacement injection pumps a couple of times a year and rebuilt injectors about 10 times a year. It's because of water contamination, and the fact that the operator only relied on his 1st line of defense (typically a "RACOR") and the marketing hype around it that led to complacency regarding fuel quality... So, I'm not going to argue about whether filtering below manufacturers' specs has a benefit - what I'll argue is the way most people filter fuel. And, that typically is that the vessel and / or operator is relying on a single filter to remove water and contaminants before he sends that "filtered" fuel to his on-engine" last chance fuel filter - This is a major mistake in judgment as to think that the last chance filter will save him. We hope to convince our customers that a well designed fuel system will deliver fuel to the engine, and to it's "on-engine fuel filter", that is all ready clean enough that he is not relying on this "last chance" filter to save him.
Triple Multi-Stage for problem fuel tanks - QSL's in a small "crew boat" with problem fuel tanks - No chances taken here as we have a "water absorbing" media filter in the middle and a FS19596 with a WIF Sensor as our polisher/final stage - never too much!
My thoughts, experience, and reasoning will never change about using multi-stage "primary filtration" and making sure you have the filtering capacity to get you through a lousy tank of fuel, or maybe two. With the advent of "common rail" fuel injection, just the slightest amount of water that makes it to the pump and/or injector will now have catastrophic consequences for not only your fuel system components, but could also take-out the engine.
Some RACOR Thoughts
A Racor 1000 can have very acceptable capacity when used w/ a 300-600 HP engine in typical recreational service. Use that same filter on a 200-400 HP diesel in an application that runs 2000-5000 hours per year, and in many/most cases if this unit used as the only filter before the engine, this widely used filter has unacceptable life between maintenance intervals. My point here is that designed flow rate of a filter should not be the only reason for selecting filter size but rather needs to be chosen based upon the application and vessel current use, and past fuel problem history (if any) of the vessel.
As many operators will confirm from personal experience, servicing a "Racor" can be a challenge if you want to try and keep the bowl clear and clean. Lots of parts, seals and just a plain hassle and extremely messy to deal with. But, get it clean once, install a bulk separator in front of it, and you'll see a noticeable change in the maintenance of the Racor over the next few years, along w/ giving you that added layer of protection. Also, more times than not, I have seen the bowl on a Racor so dirty that its effective use as a "visual" has become totally worthless. My preference and experience is not to rely on a "visual" at all, but to drain a sample of fuel before you use your vessel.
